There has been something of an ongoing debate online over the origins of what can be called the "Transgender Paradigm." The rather notorious kook and gender fascist Mr. "Cristan Williams" has tried to claim that the term has a long history, and that the fact that the term, and the movement that has pushed it as an umbrella term arose pretty much starting in the mid-Nineties is a "myth." Mr. Williams has provided quite a bit of highly questionable (at best) evidence, and has tried to bury opponents in an heap of ad hominem attacks and arrogance.
Well, yesterday, a very geeky web comic, that has nothing to do with transsexualism or transgender, happened to provide a link that led me to what has been missing this argument. Real evidence. Google has a site that allows you to analyze the occurrence of a collection terms in a large collection of books over a time range.
So, I checked the occurrence of three terms, "transsexual," "transvestite," and "transgender" from 1960 to the most recent data, which is 2008. The results, to say the least, destroy Mr. Williams' claims.
As can be seen from the graph, the term "transgender" is completely absent until around 1990. It then starts to becomes a bit more common during the mid-Ninties, until it finally becomes more common around 2001.
Contrary to Mr. Williams' claims, it is clear that what has been claimed by most is true. The "Transgender Movement" began in the Nineties, become increasingly active during that decade. It was effectively non-existent before 1989 at the absolute earliest.
Unlike Williams, who seems to have access to information that, well, no one else actually does, anyone can check this out for their own self. Go to http://books.google.com/ngrams and try it for yourself. You can use the values I used, or those of your own choosing. But, as they say, the matter speaks for itself.
As I have said for some time, while it is possible that there might have been isolated incidents where the term "transgender" was used, it was not a common term, and the movement that we now deal with did not exist, before around 1990. It is, instead, a very recent phenomenon, and well, Mr. Williams is delusional at best, and more likely deliberately deceptive.
Showing posts sorted by relevance for query Case Closed. Sort by date Show all posts
Showing posts sorted by relevance for query Case Closed. Sort by date Show all posts
Wednesday, November 28, 2012
Thursday, May 17, 2012
Uh, Not Even Remotely Right....
I wonder sometimes where the transgender kooks come up with some of their ideas. Take, for example, this bit of insanity from "Autumn" Sandeen over on LGBT Weekly:
First off, I think anyone who identifies as a "trans" person probably ought to serious question the wisdom of having surgery. If you are that attached to your past, well then you just might miss certain parts when they are gone. For example, let me be very clear on this...I would never suggest that Mr. Sandeen have surgery. By beef with Mr. Sandeen is not that he has not had surgery, or that he does not need surgery, but that he has taken to claiming to be a transsexual, and that he claims to be a female. He is neither, and even if he had surgery, it would not make him a woman. It would simply make him a man with a vagina. Like several other transgender kooks who made the mistake of going too far.
No, there are a lot of "trans" people who really, REALLY, REALLY should never have surgery, and more than a few who should not have done it who already have. Some publicly regret it, others regret it while denying they regret it, but acting in ways that harm true transsexuals.
I know of no one who remotely demands that anyone should have surgery. Yes, I believe that surgery, including vaginoplasty, should be a requirement for changing a birth certificate in the case of a male to female transsexual. I think that male to females should at the very least have to have upper surgery, a complete hysterectomy and removal of the ovaries, and the vagina closed before being allowed to change their birth certificate. I understand the limitations of FTM surgery, and am sympathetic to their plight.
Retaining the physical genitals of one sex, while claiming to be a member of the other is simply dishonest. But then so is a lot of things Mr. Sandeen tries to pass off on society.
Somewhere in between the extremes of people who demand no trans people should have surgery, and those who demand all trans people have surgery there is middle ground that recognizes that no group of trans people really should dictate what trans experience is the universal trans experience.Huh? "Those who demand all trans people have surgery...?" Now, I realize this is in the context of Mr. Sandeen trying to cover up the fact that he is darn close to one who claims that no one needs surgery (he has denigrated those who have the surgery, and implied that we still have penises, etc.) but really, even he can't be that completely ignorant, can he?
First off, I think anyone who identifies as a "trans" person probably ought to serious question the wisdom of having surgery. If you are that attached to your past, well then you just might miss certain parts when they are gone. For example, let me be very clear on this...I would never suggest that Mr. Sandeen have surgery. By beef with Mr. Sandeen is not that he has not had surgery, or that he does not need surgery, but that he has taken to claiming to be a transsexual, and that he claims to be a female. He is neither, and even if he had surgery, it would not make him a woman. It would simply make him a man with a vagina. Like several other transgender kooks who made the mistake of going too far.
No, there are a lot of "trans" people who really, REALLY, REALLY should never have surgery, and more than a few who should not have done it who already have. Some publicly regret it, others regret it while denying they regret it, but acting in ways that harm true transsexuals.
I know of no one who remotely demands that anyone should have surgery. Yes, I believe that surgery, including vaginoplasty, should be a requirement for changing a birth certificate in the case of a male to female transsexual. I think that male to females should at the very least have to have upper surgery, a complete hysterectomy and removal of the ovaries, and the vagina closed before being allowed to change their birth certificate. I understand the limitations of FTM surgery, and am sympathetic to their plight.
Retaining the physical genitals of one sex, while claiming to be a member of the other is simply dishonest. But then so is a lot of things Mr. Sandeen tries to pass off on society.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)